Count how many images on your page are missing alt text, and see samples of the ones that are. Accessibility and image search read the same attribute.
Measuring rankings in
Runs the full audit on your live site. Your report opens in your dashboard.
This counts every img element on the page, counts how many have no alt attribute or an empty one, and reports the share along with samples of the offending sources so you can find them in the template. An empty alt is treated as missing here, which is worth knowing, because on a genuinely decorative image an empty alt is the correct markup rather than an oversight.
Alt text is the only description of an image that a machine ever gets. A screen reader reads it aloud, image search indexes on it, and a crawler that cannot see pictures uses it to understand what a page contains. On a product or portfolio page, where the images carry most of the meaning, missing alt text means the most important part of the page is invisible to everything except a human with working vision.
More than half the images undescribed is scored as a warning, and the report names the files so the fix is targeted rather than a sweep of the whole site. Describe the image in a sentence a person would use, do not start with "image of", and leave the alt empty and deliberate on decorative elements. Automatically generated alt text that repeats the file name is worse than nothing: it passes the check and helps no one.
Alt coverage is one of the lower-weighted checks here and it is genuinely worth fixing, which is a combination worth reading carefully. The audit shows you where it sits: if it is your worst finding, the site is in good shape, and if it is not, start higher up.
The result of a bulk fix. Somebody was told to add alt text to every image and did exactly that.
Every image has an alt attribute, so a presence check passes and the task is marked done. What a screen reader announces is a filename read aloud, which is worse than the fallback it replaced because it sounds like a description. Generated alt text derived from the source path is the one failure mode this check cannot catch on its own — which is exactly why the report shows you the sources rather than only the count. The opposite fault appears in the same sweeps: alt="" applied to every image including the ones carrying real information.
<img src="/uploads/IMG_4471.jpg" alt="IMG_4471">
<img src="/uploads/hero-2x@2.webp" alt="hero-2x@2">
<img src="/uploads/team-shot-final-v3.jpg" alt="team shot final v3">alt="" tells assistive technology to skip it. A missing attribute makes it announce the filename. These are opposites, not degrees.alt="View your cart", not alt="cart icon".A short plain sentence describing what the image shows and why it is there. Skip "image of". If the image contains text that matters, put that text in the alt. Aim to be useful to someone who cannot see it rather than to a crawler.
No. Give them an empty alt attribute so assistive technology skips them. Omitting the attribute entirely is different: that makes a screen reader announce the file name, which is the worst of both.
It is how images rank in image search and it adds context to the page. It is not a place to list keywords. Stuffed alt text is easy to detect, and it makes the page worse for the audience the attribute exists to serve.
Written up properly, for the question a result usually raises next.
More free tools in on page and content, and the rest of the set at all free tools.
Free account, no card. Paste your URL and get a real, scored report of your AI and search visibility.
Measuring rankings in